Nero Burning for Linux 599
ceasol writes "The German company Nero, developers of the award-winning Nero Burning ROM suite for Windows, now release a free version for Linux called NeroLINUX a CD/DVD Burning Software, and include many features from the Windows version. This software is proprietary but free if you registered." The OEM versions of Nero that come with many CD burners aren't sufficient, though; NeroLINUX is free-as-in-beer only if you've registered "a full version of Nero software version 6 or higher," or a "retail version or downloaded version."
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Useless (Score:4, Insightful)
Advantages of Nero? (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems, that cdrecord and k3b (or xtoaster) does everything I need
Re:Useless (Score:4, Insightful)
This Makes Me See How Important FOSS Is To Me (Score:5, Insightful)
I started using Linux somewhere around 1998, and moved everything (except compatibility testing) around 2000/2001. Since then I learned how to add almost any program or game I wanted with rpm -ivh {package_name}, then urpmi {package_name}, and now apt-get install {package_name}. It's not just the ease of use, but knowing that it is available, to me and anyone who wants it, that I can modify it or pay to have it modified, that I can help debug it, and even suggest new features.
I (mis)read this story and my first thoughts were, 1) Why bother, I've got programs that do almost all, to 2) But it's hard to do some of the DVD authoring that Nero will help with, to 3) But Nero controls it.
That's when I realized how important FOSS is to me and my company. I hadn't realized that I actually avoid commercial software now, and prefer FOSS, since I can make bug reports, make suggestions, and even modify if I need to. I also realized I do NOT want software (any more) that another company controls and can decide to remove from the market, or bastardize so it's no longer the program I liked. If it's FOSS, I know I'll almost always be able to find an older version if I need it, and that I can always locate it and re-install it easily if it gets horked.
So let Nero do what they want. I know in a year or two we'll see better DVD authoring under Linux (and eventually even see professional video editing in FOSS). This story helped me realize I can no longer deal with paying for software with fewer freedoms than that which apt-get installs for me. I don't want software someone else has total control over. (Okay, well maybe Myst and it's sequals, but we all know games are another story...)
Commercial Desktop App (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not trying to say Nero is better/worse than the alternatives, but now there is an additional alternative -- and software companies focusing on desktop apps are starting to take a Linux desktop more seriously.
Re:Useless (Score:4, Insightful)
A well-thought CLI program is often more convenient the first time you use it. In the case of mkisofs, the "synopsis" at the very start of the manpage is enough for the typical use. On the other hand, it's pretty non-obvious to guess what do I need to choose to burn the damn files in a badly-designed thing like Nero.
And this applies to the first-time use. For the subsequent, you can't really beat the CLI.
Slashdot 2 days late? (Score:5, Insightful)
Essentially it is using the GnomeToaster GUI under license (not GPL) with a Nero API/drivers backend.
It's closed source and doesn't include Nero Recode (aka DVD Shrink) or anything other than Nero Burning ROM.
must mean that MS is doing a CD burner (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Advantages of Nero? (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, Nero is considerably better in its interfaces than even k3b.
meh (Score:2, Insightful)
Catch-22 as usual... (Score:5, Insightful)
And then the linux community wonders why so few companies bother to code for linux.
Re:This *is* important. (Score:5, Insightful)
I would almost agree, except, as others pointed out, they are a dollar short and several days late.
5 years ago, hell, even 2 years ago, I would have seen value in a decent burning GUI. Since then, we have K3B and the new Gnome whatchamacallit, that both do the same thing, better, support more formats, and are not hindered by little things like CSS.... Sooo, how seriously can they be taking this product?
This might even cause OSS harm. Now hardware companies can make proprietary changes to the hardware interface, say, for copy protection. When people complain that Linux can't use the hardware, they can reasonably point to Nero as a burning solution. So not only does this not bring anything new or desirable to the desktop, it can be used to further hinder development of truly open and free systems.
Nero is to K3B arguably what OSX is to Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Again, it's not that K3B isn't competitive. It certainly is, but it's not there yet. Nero for Linux appears to be identical in its UI to the Windows version so it's another great way to bridge Linux and Windows. The bottom line is that it is very good, many people have it because it comes with many burners and having it on Linux will be another program that people who are wont to not learn how to use their computer will be able to say, "oh I know that program" that is part of their semi-daily use.
OK folks, make up your minds... (Score:3, Insightful)
Kudo's to Ahead for making a software product particularly targeted for Linux! Looking at their site, I see that it SUPPORTS a number of kernel versions and distributions.
Hmm, I bet corporate customers are really fond of software that has some form of customer support besides newsgroups!
Just because flavor-of-the-week-open-source-burner-software works great for you doesnt mean that it will work great for companies! It also doesnt mean we should bash the existence of that choice. Companies *will* pay money to improve consistancy and to reduce variability. A known cost is better than an unknown cost. Unsupported (or community) software is an unknown cost. Most companies would rather pay the known cost (maintenance) than deal with the unknown.
(Yes that was a blanket statement. In some cases, the cost can be quantified a bit better for some of these unsupported/community supported softwares and with such knowledge you can significantly reduce the variability. Generally this fits tools that are almost defacto standards like Apache and what not.)
I like to think of it this way... its one more option available on Linux that you can also find in the Windows world, making it one more item which can be checked off in the "why [some company] scared to transition to linux" list.
Re:Advantages of Nero? (Score:4, Insightful)
Missing the point... (Score:4, Insightful)
I understand the necessity of promoting non-restricted open source software, but things like this are a plus for Linux, particularly if we are holding out any chance that it will start to make serious waves on the desktop.
Re:This *is* important. (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, and that's nice and all, but they're scratching an itch that's already been scratched - for ages now - and with superb tools that have zero cost to the end user.
Sheesh... you can only use the "free" version of NeroLINUX if you've paid for a Microsoft Windows version. So, if you don't even use Microsoft Windows, you have to buy an app for it anyway. No thanks.
Re:But can it compete? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Catch-22 as usual... (Score:1, Insightful)
Not a bad idea overall (Score:3, Insightful)
I imagine that this would also help those with a phobia of new software, as this would be one more application that would be the same for them under both Linux and Windows (similar to Firefox, or OpenOffice, etc).
Now, I'll admit I haven't used Nero (or Windows) in several years on any of my computers, but from using K3b these days, I can't see anything that it is lacking that Nero might provide. Has anybody used both apps recently (NeroLINUX would be an even better comparison) and can comment on how they compare?
Overall, I'd say this is good for those on Windows now who are considering switching to Linux, and of lesser consequence to those already using Linux.
May not be needed, but a nice gesture (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, *NIX fans already have k3b, X-CD-Roast, ECLiPt, and others. But on the flip side, this software is in the vein of what many people have been asking for -- mainstream recognition and support of Linux.
What if I don't want to purchase Nero for windows? (Score:3, Insightful)
What if someone doesn't have any windows boxes? Is it that tough to make it available to purchase directly??
I'm glad they've done this. The more products that are ported natively to Linux, the better in my opinion. They just need to stop tying it to their windows products.
H.
Re:Catch-22 as usual... (Score:3, Insightful)
The reaction I'm seeing here has been fairly positive, gievn that nero really isn't providing anything I can get very excited about (buy a microsoft windows version I'll never use, in order to get a "free" linux version?) but in general we welcome more vendors to the linux marketplace.
I like k3b, but I'm always willing to check out the alternatives, and hopefully one day I'll be able to buy nero for linux without the useless microsoft baggage.
Re:Free as in... (Score:4, Insightful)
Regardless, I was actually curious to see what kind of burning solution they bring to Linux. So far most (if not all) graphical burners are just frontends for cdrdao, cdrtools or dvd+rw-tools.
Rumour has it they used GnomeToaster [rulez.org] for the interface. If NeroLinux is just another frontend, then it will be quickly dismissed by serious Linux users, who already have several established alternatives to choose from.
But the NeroLinux presentation mentions all kinds of goodies, including "NeroAPI 6.6" interfacing with 2.4 and 2.6 kernels. A new player in the Linux burning arena, coupled with an actual full port of Nero to Linux, would be a wonderful thing IMO. Serious competition is always good.
Either way, this is good news for the Linux user base. One less application for the newbies to worry about when pondering switching to Linux. Nevermind if it comes with a native burning solution or not; just knowing that "Nero has a Linux version" will encourage people to switch. I personally heard many say Nero was the last app holding them back. This is one of the highest profile apps for Windows, and now it has established a Linux presence. This is great news.
And the Trolls come out to play... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Catch-22 as usual... (Score:1, Insightful)
Right! Those Windows users never bitch about anything!
--
Re:But can it compete? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, most of the needs of the FOSS/Linux/BSD community are taken care of by the FOSS community and a whole variety of free software, so much so that most opportunities/markets are saturated.
However, when a well-recognized company tries to enter the Linux market, it faces comments such as the parent's. Why would any commercial software company take the Linux community seriously, as a potential market, when the Linux community does not take them seriously, unless it is free?
So NeroLinux is not free. Perhaps it is worse than GnomeBaker and K3B. But at least they recognize the Linux community. Encouraging Nero to try harder, rather than posting trollish comments about how it's not free and not as good as other software, would do more to help Linux's image in the corporate world.
After all, the FOSS community is not the be-all and end-all of software development.
Re:This *is* important. (Score:5, Insightful)
As to how it can cause OSS harm.. Where on earth did you get that from? Nero producing a product has nothing to do with hardware companies making proprietary changes. They've always been able to do that, and always have. Can you say "Winmodem" or "Windows Printer"? Both designed with proprietary interfaces which Linux can't use.
The former I stayed well away from, the latter, well, I run a Konica Minolta magicolour 2300W. Works just fine from my Linux boxes.
Now, if someone produced hardware that linux just couldn't talk to, then Nero would be stuffed, as it wouldn't be able to use the api to talk to the hardware anyway, at least until a driver writer finds a way to talk to the hardware properly again.
It may just have skipped past your attention, but the whole 'trusted computing' initiative is heading to put just those copy controls in every device.
Now, if Nero has the bits built in there to cope with it from the moment it's released, and the rest of the open tools lag, at least there's some product out there that can handle the slack until Open works it out, and gets back in the game.
If it doesn't, no big deal. People use what they feel like.
I think about twelve years back, you'd have been one of those voices saying "Linux. That gives us nothing new. It's just another UNIX alike. What do we need that for? It'll only hamper the BSDs and not provide us with anything worthwhile in return!".
A product is a product. I'm glad Nero are in the market. They're offering something to compliment their windows product, for those people that may be wanting to move from Windows to Linux, and just want something they already know and are familiar with.
Anything that makes the transition easier is a great thing.
The great thing about OSS is it's a really open market. You can charge what you want for your product (including free). Nero want money for you to be able to have their product (you have to have the retail version, or buy one to get it). That's fine! If you don't want it, don't get it. Nobody uses it, and it'll go away (just like MusicMatch Jukebox for Linux did way back when).
But, it's there. And there are some more developers who've been exposed to Linux.
And as Ballmer is always chanting, it's all about "Developers, developers, developers".
Re:Advantages of Nero? (Score:2, Insightful)
The biggest stumbling block for mainstream Linux viability is its perceived difficulty to use *and* there being far fewer popular titles available.
Nero, while duplicating what other (open source) developers have done, may not be doing anything cutting edge with their application, at least they are doing *something*, and doing it for *free* (to their existing paid customers).
If it helps even one non-Linux use to think themselves "Hmmm, maybe there is something to this whole Linux thing. Maybe I should try it!" -- that is a great thing.
Re:Useless (Score:5, Insightful)
Because I *never* had any problems at all getting Nero (v. 5) to work, even the first time. Click the "new CD" button (in the same location that the new document is in every other GUI ever made), pick the type of CD you want, drag the files you want from the hard drive window to the new window that represents the CD, click the "write CD" button or choose "write CD" from the file menu, click burn.
I never had to look in any documentation to figure out how to do anything that wasn't pretty complicated.
After reading the ENTIRE mkisofs man page, I still don't know if I know how to actually write the ISO to the CD, I just have a pointer to look at cdwrite and this -o option that sounds like I can add
I'm not trying to judge you our your opitions, I'm just trying to show that there are very legitimate reasons why someone will prefer a GUI. They are almost universally easier to use than text tools, as you have to go to documentation to figure out how to do things with text tools whereas you can poke around for a minute or two with a GUI. (I'm talking Unix style text tools here, not like NCurses stuff, or even programs that present you with a series of text menus.)
Of course, there are legitimate reasons for liking a command line too. It's scriptable. You can set it up to do repetitive tasks automatically. (Not very useful for CD burning since you still need to put in new CDs, but this is an exception to the rule.) If you know what you're doing, it's often faster than a GUI. (Though again, I can essentially gurantee I can find files in a graphical tree much faster than with a command line, especially for something like CD backups where I'm looking in many of the directories to see if there's anything I need to archive. This is again an exception to the general case.)
But to say that a CLI program is more convenient or that you're better off with a CLI is nothing more than your personal opinion.
The real question? (Score:1, Insightful)
3
Can i use nero linux?
no
Am i going to get a linuxnero license?
no
Will oems bundle nero linux?
And the winner is:
Re:It's pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
???
The same thing as any other burning application?
Or are you thinking the software world for Linux should contain exactly one software for each purpose?
It's only value is that it includes a comprehensive point&click interface, but even though it's stuffed with features, it can't beat the existing, free tools.
OK, there you gave reason #1 (good GUI) and #2 (feature set) to use it on Linux, yourself. And being "Free" (libra) doesn't matter to all Linux users at all, believe it or not. And being "free" (gratis), well, see below...
Unless you're a Windows user who wants a program he's familiar with, there is no reason to even look at it.
Exactly! And there you gave reason #3 (familiarity).
Plus, it's not even free-as-beer, as you need to pay for a full, registered version of Nero for Windows.
Yeah, and Linux isn't free because you need to pay the hardware first. The point is that Nero is among the most commonly used burning apps on Windows there is, so existing licenses shouldn't be too uncommon. But yes, of course if you're building a Linux box from scratch, with no prior license for Nero, you should carefully consider the advantages and disadvantages for all apps. Fortunately, you have a choice here.
Re:But can it compete? (Score:4, Insightful)
If they are offering inferior software at a greater price than the competition, they cannot really complain if their product is not greeted with rapturous approval. When you consider that freedom is more important than free for many GNU/Linux users, the arrival of a non-free, inferior product will not make much impact.
It is good that companies are taking notice of GNU/Linux, but if they want to make an impact their software should be superior to that which currently exists or free. Or both.
Re:This *is* important. (Score:5, Insightful)
Utility applications like CD burning programs aren't hard to replicate, as there are a certain set of features that need to be implemented to satisfy almost all users. Most people need to burn audio and data CDs, and an emerging need is burning home movies onto DVDs. The first two have already been done by open source programs, and the third will be done eventually. From what I hear, Nero has more features that make it useful, but I don't think it provides enough marginal utility to be worth $100 [nero.com]. Nero has succeeded in the Windows world largely due to their distributon deals with OEMs. However, their Linux product will not be profitable. The Linux version doesn't even have the extra features that make the Windows version attractive, but assuming that it eventually does, they won't be worth $100 to most people. The Linux version won't get them any extra distribution, and Linux users who buy CD burners already pay Nero money anyway. The extra effort spent on a Linux port won't be worth it, and they'll soon figure that out.
There is room for commercial software on Linux, but it has to be innovative software to succeed. There has to be something that the company continues to provide that hasn't been replicated by the eventual open source implementation of their product. Competing with free is possible, but not in Nero's case. Competing with Free is even harder.
Re:Nero would have better spent their time and $$$ (Score:4, Insightful)
Isn't Linux about everyone using what suits them, and everyone having a choice? Did Nero have a choice? Yeps. They made Nero for Linux.
I've been using Linux for ages, and I mostly use console + WindowMaker. Guess what - k3b won't work on WM. GnomeWhatever? Same story. And so on, and so on.
Anyway, kudos to Nero.
I used to pay $20 (or was it $25?) for OSS Yamaha sound-card driver, years ago. I didn't mind doing it. If NeroLINUX works well, I won't mind paying for it either. If Total Commander shows up for Linux tomorrow, they'll be getting my money.
I don't use Linux because I want everything for free (although it would be nice). If you use Linux because of that, then skip commenting on this article, since it's obviuosly not intented for you.
Re:Useless (Score:1, Insightful)
(Hint:
(Answer: yes.)
Re:Nero is to K3B arguably what OSX is to Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Catch-22 as usual... (Score:5, Insightful)
The body of your post is not an example of Catch-22, never mind a good example.
Re:This *is* important. (Score:3, Insightful)
And when they're ready, you sell them on Mandrake. You show them a live CD on their system. You give them apps they're familiar with to lure them over to the better OS. You show them how most of the software can be automatically downloaded and installed by just asking for it. You show them crossover office and the Linux gaming community.
And when they're ready, you sell them on Gentoo, Portage, and even better burning software. You show them how to compile everything for their own system. You teach them how to write their own shell scripts to automate tedious tasks, and how to install and setup servers on their home machine for easier remote access.
And when they've gone through all of that and they're ready for the ultimate Linux experience, you sell them an iBook.
The big names do bring something of value to the table. They bring security. Not the Linux "I'm not going to be hacked" kind of security, but a security that if these other possibilities don't work out, at least you have this devil you know to fall back on. It's the kind of reassurance that most people need before they'll switch to a new system.
As I've said, even on Windows XP Nero is redundant for most people. But it brings legitimacy and security for people who don't know the ropes, and those are exactly the kinds of people that need to be brought into the Linux fold if 2005,6,7,8, or 9 is to be the "year of the Linux desktop."
Yay! (Score:2, Insightful)
This is great news!
So what if it isnt free as in freedom. Anyone who belives that Linux will have a chanse against Windows and OS X while running exclusively OSS needs to jank his or hers head out of the skies and get down to earth.
Im buying a lisence!
Re:Useless (Score:4, Insightful)
Then I made teh switch to Linux and tried a couple GUI CD burning applications and hated them. I was so relieved when I found how easy the two step process of mkisofs and cdrecord was on the CLI that that's all I used for a long time.
Then I discovered k3b. I don't use KDE, but I really like the ease of use that k3b provides, so I've switched back from CLI to GUI.
Re:But can it compete? (Score:4, Insightful)
Eventually, Nero will probably blame their bad product/marketing on the attitude (or lack of) Linux users, and will leave the Linux market. It has happened before, it will happen again.
I hope that Nero and other companies wake up and realize that Linux users do not need them, they need Linux users. For this reason, they must cater to the user's needs. This is a product which caters to no one's need, thus it will fail. Come out with new and great products which Linux users actually want and would pay for, market it well, and get a return on your investment.
Linux users want screenshots, trial versions (if not open source), and most importantly -- a unique and interesting product! Don't give us a list of features and assume that we will be brand conscious -- especially if we don't know your brand! Don't forget that your brand means nothing if you're in a completely new market. This is your first impression and you've blown it. Sorry, insert quarters and try again.
Re:But can it compete? (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't blame Nero for leaving because of the attitude of Linux users. It was the point I was trying to make. However, as many *nix developers realized, Linux needs corporate support too, and the more support it gets from software developers, the more appealing it will be as a platform.
Linux needs software houses like Nero as much as Nero needs the Linux market, if not more. Ever wonder why more software companies cater to Mac than to Linux?
Re:Useless (Score:2, Insightful)
FreeBSD? man burncd should help you.
To burn your ISO image (example from the burncd manual):
burncd -f
IMHO, far easier and far more elegant than Linux's cdrecord and its horrendous SCSI emulation hack.
Re:Useless (Score:3, Insightful)
Honestly. Mod the comment, not the user.
there's more than one community (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This *is* important. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nero is to K3B arguably what OSX is to Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
have you actually used k3b recently? or ever? or are you just on some sort of linux-apps-are-not-there-yet autopilot mode?
Re:Free as in... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, what's holding them back is that they lack a sense of adventure, a yearning for the unknown, a thirst for knowledge. In short: they're not geeks.
Don't get your hopes up. They'll find another "last app holding them back."
Jeremy
Re:Free as in... (Score:2, Insightful)
And for the record, Nero isn't a very high profile app at all. It's a good app, no question, but most people don't even know what it is. Plus, there's better apps out there for most of it's functions, Nero just has a rather good implementation of them all.
Re:Advantages of Nero? (Score:3, Insightful)
Short answer: If you're the kind of person who already uses RealPlayer on Linux, Yahoo Messenger on Linux, Macromedia Flash on Linux, and all the rest of the proprietary Windows apps, then you'll probably be interested in Nero on Linux. For a while. Until Nero realise that everyone is ignoring them and quietly abandons the software.
Shorter answer: No, it can't be distributed freely so there's a good chance you won't even have it on a typical machine, while K3B will be installed by default.
The Linux packaging mechanisms are optimised for software which can be freely shared, modified and redistributed. Nero are complete outsiders to that mechanism.
Re:So... dear Linux community what do YOU want? (Score:3, Insightful)
Already you've contradicted yourself. The MySQL situation you just described is about people who offer commercial support service for non-commercial software. If you're not collecting money in exchange for access to software, then it isn't really commercial. And, the GPL is incompatible with all of the most natural ways to charge money for software. (Unless you can find a GPL loophole, such as hardware key verification, etc)
but a lot of those companies out there are making software which they use to either support their infrastucture and/or sell support for it to their customers.
Such business models aren't long-term viable. You can be a support company, or a software company, or even a support company which does incidental software programming on the side- but a software development company that gets paid through support fees won't last.
That fact is, that for high quality software in most fields, the need for support should be low. As software improves over time, it becomes more and more able to run without expert support for normal uses. (Just look at the history of Microsoft's DOS to Windows 3.1 to Windows95 to WindowsXP. The degree of support needed to achieve the same results has gone down and down). If the software is any good, there will be other dedicated support companies undercutting the fees charged by the original developers, whose costs are higher.
For the majority of software categories, paid support is not a plausible revenue source- certainly not in the long term. This is the perverse incentive [wikipedia.org] of free software: if programmers earn their money by explaining how to use their software, then improving the software will actually cost the developers money. So they have no financial incentive to fix it.
the former is in accordance with my conclusion (that commercial Free software is widespread and in increasingly heavy use in the industry)
Huh? You actually think that eleven-fingered humans are widespread and an increasingly heavy presecense in the population??
Those two lines are obviously contradictory as the former is in accordance with my conclusion
They're not contradictory, unless you have more precise statistics on what percentage of human beings are born with 11 fingers. I don't know myself (because doctors are so quick to slice off the extra digits, measurement is difficult), so I admit the 99.999% figure was just a guess. The meaning was that the GPL is incompatible with commericial software development in all normal cases, or 99.999% of the time.
my conclusion since the evidence is so overwhelmingly obvious.
Both of those links support my position that Free Software can rarely be commercially marketed.